Locking stand-alone cages versus anterior plate constructs in single-level fusion for degenerative cervical disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To conduct a meta-analysis to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes in single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery for degenerative cervical disease performed by either single-level locking stand-alone cage (LSC) or anterior plate construct (APC). METHODS: We performed a comprehensive database search of Medline, PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews according to PRISMA guidelines and identified six articles that satisfied our inclusion criteria. We excluded all non-English language articles and articles which did not directly compare LSC and APC. Only papers which focussed on single-level ACDF were included in the study. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in blood loss, clinical outcomes (JOA, VAS, NDI scores) or radiological outcomes (cervical lordosis, segmental Cobb angle, subsidence and fusion) between the two groups. Operative time was significantly shorter in the LSC group (MD 7.2 min, 95% CI 0.3-14.1, p = 0.04). APC was associated with a statistically significant increase in dysphagia in the follow-up period (OR 6.2, 95% CI 1.0-36.6, p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: LSC and APC have similar clinical and radiological outcomes. Further blinded randomised trials are required to establish conclusive evidence in favour of LSC with regards to minimising post-operative dysphagia. We also encourage future studies to make use of formalised dysphagia outcome measures in reporting complications.

What is the optimum fusion technique for adult isthmic spondylolisthesis--PLIF or PLF? A long-term prospective cohort comparison study.

STUDY DESIGN: Long-term prospective observational cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to compare the long-term functional outcomes of posterolateral fusion (PLF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) for the treatment of adult isthmic spondylolisthesis (IS). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: PLIF has the theoretical advantage of improving sagittal alignment and providing a larger, more consistent fusion mass in patients with IS compared with PLF. Studies to date though have not shown a clinical difference, with follow-up of 2 years. METHODS: An prospective cohort study was performed of a single surgeon's patients with IS treated surgically over a 10-year period. Average follow-up was 7 years and 10 months. Preoperative patient characteristics between the 2 groups were not significantly different. The return rate of the long-term questionnaires was 83%. Outcome measures were the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), Low Back Outcome Score (LBOS), Short Form (SF)-12v2, and SF-6D R2. RESULTS: PLIF provided better short-term and long-term results than PLF. The PLIF group had significantly better LBOS scores in the long term, and nonsignificantly better RMDQ scores. As measured by the RMDQ Minimal Clinically Important Difference set at 4 and 8, the LBOS Minimal Clinically Important Difference set at 7.5 points and by SF-12v2 Physical Component Score, PLIF patients performed better than PLF patients. When analyzing single-level fusions alone, the difference is more pronounced, with Physical Component Score, Mental Component Scores, and SF-6D R2 all being significantly better in the PLIF group rather than the PLF group. CONCLUSIONS: This study strongly supports the use of PLIF to obtain equivalent or superior clinical outcomes compared with PLF for spinal fusion for lumbar IS. Although there are considerable issues when commenting on the results of observational studies, the results of this study are the first to report long-term follow-up beyond 2 years, and further larger long-term randomized studies are suggested.

Blood Loss Following Open Posterior Spinal Fusion in Fractures: Cannulated vs. Solid Pedicle Screws.

We aim to delineate whether there is increased blood loss with the use of cannulated pedicle screws compared to solid pedicle screws in patients undergoing posterior spinal fusion. A single-centre retrospective case-control study was undertaken on patients undergoing PSF for spinal fractures. Cannulated screw fixation was compared with solid screw fixation. Intraoperative blood loss was estimated using pre and postoperative haemoglobin levels, recorded estimated blood loss and cell saver reports. Anticoagulation, blood product administration, operative time and number of levels fused were assessed. A total of 64 cases, 32 in each cohort, were included in the analysis. Overall mean haemoglobin reduction from pre- to post-operative was 2.82 ± 1.85 g/L per screw inserted in the cannulated group, compared to a haemoglobin decrease of 2.81 ± 1.521 g/L per screw inserted in the solid screw group (p = 0.971). Total estimated intraoperative blood loss was 616.3 + 355.4 mL in the cannulated group, compared to 713.6 + 473.5 mL in the solid screw group (p = 0.456). Patients with preoperative thrombocytopenia had a transfusion rate of 0.5 ± 0.71 units/patient compared to 0.04 ± 0.19 units/patient in patients with normal platelet levels (p < 0.005). The differences in blood loss observed between cannulated and solid pedicle screws are non-significant overall. The largest predictor for need of transfusion was pre-operative thrombocytopenia, regardless of the type of screw used.

Healthcare Practitioners Knowledge of Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA).

Background: Vaccine pharmacovigilance is at the forefront of the public eye. Shoulder Injuries Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) is a poorly understood Adverse Event Following Immunisation, with iatrogenic origins. Criteria for medicolegal diagnosis of SIRVA is conflicting, current literature and educational materials are lacking, and healthcare practitioner knowledge of the condition is unknown. Methods: A cross-sectional, convenience sampled survey, utilising a validated online questionnaire assessed practitioner knowledge of SIRVA, safe injecting, and upper limb anatomy, and preferred definition for SIRVA. Results: Mean scores were moderate for safe injecting knowledge (69%), and poor for knowledge of anatomy (42%) and SIRVA (55%). Non-immunising healthcare practitioners scored significantly (p = 0.01, and < 0.05, respectively) higher than immunising practitioners for anatomy (2.213 ± 1.52 vs. 3.12 ± 1.50), and safe injecting knowledge (6.70 ± 1.34 vs. 7.14 ± 1.27). Only 52% of authorised vaccinators accurately selected a 40 × 20 mm area recommended for safe injecting. Majority (91.7%) of respondents thought nerve injuries should be included in the diagnostic criteria for SIRVA. Discussion and conclusions: Greater education and awareness of SIRVA is needed in all healthcare disciplines. Consensus regarding SIRVA definition is paramount for accurate reporting and improved future understanding of all aspects of SIRVA.

Does preoperative DVT chemoprophylaxis in spinal surgery affect the incidence of thromboembolic complications and spinal epidural hematomas?

BACKGROUND: Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolus (PE) remain common surgical complications, often affecting patients without any prior warning. Postoperative spinal epidural hematomas (SEH) may have a devastating impact on a patient's recovery from a routine procedure. The effect of preoperative DVT prophylaxis administration on elective spinal patients has not previously been studied. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis. OBJECTIVE: To correlate the incidence of preoperative DVT prophylaxis administration and the rate of postoperative DVT, PE, and SEH after elective spinal surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Earlier studies have shown a postoperative DVT rate in elective spinal patients of between 0.3% and 31%, a PE rate of 0.2% to 0.9%, and a SEH rate of approximately 0.1%. METHODS: About 3870 patient notes, from 2004 to 2008 elective spinal procedures, were reviewed. DVT, PE, and SEH rates were compared between those patients receiving and not receiving preoperative DVT prophylaxis. RESULTS: The 36.9% of patients received preoperative DVT prophylaxis, and 19 patients suffered and DVT and/or PE. Nine of these had received preoperative prophylaxis, giving an odds ratio of 0.91. Sixteen patients suffered a SEH, and this gave an odds ratio of 1.33. The SEH's presented with a median postoperative time of 4 days. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative DVT prophylaxis does not influence the rate of postoperative DVT or PE among elective spinal patients. It probably does not influence SEH rate, and it is noted that SEH may present quite late, in contrast to currently accepted time courses.

The Influence of No Fault Compensation on Functional Outcomes After Lumbar Spine Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study and systematic literature review. OBJECTIVE: To compare the functional outcomes for lumbar spinal fusion in both compensation and noncompensation patients in an environment of universal no fault compensation and then to compare these outcomes with those in worker's compensation and nonworkers compensation cohorts from other countries. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Compensation has an adverse effect on outcomes in spine fusion possibly based on adversarial environment, delayed resolution of claims and care, and increased compensation associated with prolonged disability. It is unclear whether a universal no fault compensation system would provide different outcomes for these patients. New Zealand's Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) provides universal no fault compensation for personal injury secondary to accident and offers an opportunity to compare results with differing provision of compensation. METHODS: A total of 169 patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion were assessed preoperatively, at 1 year, and at long-term follow-up out to 14 years, using functional outcome measures and health-related quality-of-life measures. Comparison was made between those covered and not covered by ACC for 3 distinct diagnostic categories. A systematic literature review comparing outcomes in Worker's Compensation and non-Compensation cohorts was also performed. RESULTS: The functional outcomes for both ACC and non-ACC cohorts were similar, with significant and comparable improvements over the first year that were then sustained out to long-term follow-up for both cohorts. At long-term follow-up, the health-related quality-of-life measures were the same between the 2 cohorts.The literature review revealed a marked difference in outcomes between worker's compensation and non-worker's compensation cohorts with a near universal inferior outcome for the compensation group. CONCLUSION: The similarities in outcomes of patients undergoing lumbar spine fusion under New Zealand's universal no fault compensation system, when compared with the dramatically inferior outcomes for these patients under other worker's compensation systems, suggest that the system of compensation has a major influence on patient outcomes, and that change of compensation to a universal no fault system is beneficial for patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.